Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Gnarls Barkley discography/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by The Rambling Man 10:01, 9 March 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]
Gnarls Barkley discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 10:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I believe, after significant revisions of prose and the tables, that it meets the criteria. As always, any comments are appreciated if they help me to improve the page. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 10:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
- Literally a third of the lead is about one song. (just sayin')
- Trimmed it a little, but I don't think this is that unreasonable – the digital downloads in the UK fact is a rather notable chart feat, so I feel that should stay as well. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Similarly, the "Crazy" row looks comically large compared to the rest of the Singles table. I suggest removing the Gold certs; the song article can cover it.—indopug (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I see your point, but we can't just remove valid certifications for the reason of a song being massively more successful than the others in the table. This seems somewhat unnecessary, and I've never seen it done at any similar discography. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved comments from Holiday56 (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
Comments
|
- Support, as my comments have been addressed. Holiday56 (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Ruslik_Zero 16:16, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
Three further singles – "Smiley Faces", which reached the top ten of the UK and Irish singles charts,[8][9] "Who Cares?" and a cover of the Violent Femmes song "Gone Daddy Gone" were released from St. Elsewhere, although none of them appeared on the Billboard Hot 100.[10]
Add another hyphen after "Gone Daddy Gone".- Everything else seems good to me. Good job! Toa Nidhiki05 02:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS explicitly states that positions on the Bubbling Under chart should not be shown as a Hot 100 position of x+100..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Editorial opinion is widely divided on this topic, and it has been allowed in multiple FLCs before, but if you're still determined that I should do this to make it a FL then I'll make the change. Personally, I'm fine with this listing as long as a note is added explaining that it is not a direct extension, as Billboard themselves and Joel Whitburn's books have used this method. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 11:10, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose very concerned about the 3b issue here. Oddly, the main article on Gnarls Barkley actually goes into more detail about the releases than the discography article, and I don't think that can be right. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Although I acknowledge that it's not as long as other discographies, I don't think it's quite short enough to violate 3b - it has a similar number of releases and similarly detailed lead to Gotye discography, which you recently supported (sorry if that probably violates WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). As some of their releases are not very notable, it isn't really content forking to list them here, Also, the prose in the Gnarls Barkley article isn't that great: lots of it is unreferenced, and mostly concerns "Crazy", and the most significant aspects of its chart performance have already been mentioned in the lead. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 11:10, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, but all I'm saying is that you could easily merge the tables back to the main article right now. To answer you query about the Gotye discog, it was 26KB in length and the main article is 34KB. This discog is 22KB in length and the main article is 13KB, in total about half the size of the Gotye effort. So, combining the leads and removing repetition for the Gnarls Barkely stuff, you'd end up with a reasonable length article. I don't think it's a good idea to fork out a discog which is twice the size of the main article but still repeats a lot of the content of the main article. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The article on the bandleader Cee Lo has 19kb prose text. And since Green is the main force behind the band, his article should not be fully ignored. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- As this is clearly a significant issue that will require great effort on someone's (probably me) part to expand the Gnarls Barkley and Cee Lo Green pages, I would (with great sadness - sigh) like to withdraw this nomination. I am currently unaware of how to do this, so any assistance would be well appreciated. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 20:03, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The article on the bandleader Cee Lo has 19kb prose text. And since Green is the main force behind the band, his article should not be fully ignored. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 18:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, but all I'm saying is that you could easily merge the tables back to the main article right now. To answer you query about the Gotye discog, it was 26KB in length and the main article is 34KB. This discog is 22KB in length and the main article is 13KB, in total about half the size of the Gotye effort. So, combining the leads and removing repetition for the Gnarls Barkely stuff, you'd end up with a reasonable length article. I don't think it's a good idea to fork out a discog which is twice the size of the main article but still repeats a lot of the content of the main article. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Although I acknowledge that it's not as long as other discographies, I don't think it's quite short enough to violate 3b - it has a similar number of releases and similarly detailed lead to Gotye discography, which you recently supported (sorry if that probably violates WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). As some of their releases are not very notable, it isn't really content forking to list them here, Also, the prose in the Gnarls Barkley article isn't that great: lots of it is unreferenced, and mostly concerns "Crazy", and the most significant aspects of its chart performance have already been mentioned in the lead. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 11:10, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.